Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar for President. The New York Times — Just what were you thinking?

Referring to The New York Times article, The Democrats’ Best Choices For President, by the Editorial Board, published January 20, 2020

Should any newspaper, including The New York Times, endorse a candidate? after all, what is the purpose? — to lend weight to a chosen one? to counterbalance an ominous direction? to pronounce authority or smart a certain wisdom? I guess the real reasons are mixed, and may never be really clear. An additional aspect, is that more is revealed about The New York Times, than perhaps the candidates they are have endorsed — or not endorsed — or hardly mentioned (bright spark, Pete Buttigieg gets a dismissive few lines). It reminds me of the value of “references” in an application for a job, a co-op apartment or membership in the local polo club. The references often provide considerably more information about the people writing them, rather than the person they are writing about.

Both references for job seekers etc., and endorsements of political candidates are fraught, but the The New York Times’ picks for President highlight some disturbing aspects. Why are there two candidates? was this indecision? a compromise? or did the editorial team just run out of time to decide one particularly? Who knows? But the co-choice of Amy Klobuchar amounts to a cover, or manner, to promote the real choice of The New York Times — that of Elizabeth Warren. A guise of “inclusiveness” or “accommodation” or…